If it's a good idea for the government to bring about a property market in spectrum by making it illegal for most of us to broadcast; why is it unreasonable for the government to impose some burdens on those broadcasters?
Given that the airwaves were ours to begin with, we ought to expect to make some money off of allocating this valuable resource to private firms. How much do we make per year for selling radio station licenses? TV licenses?
If that number is not obscenely high, then I would suggest that the massive value we are bequeathing to these private firms damn well ought to be freighted with social value-maximizing restrictions and requirements.
Why is it OK for the government to regulate property into existence, but not OK for the government to then regulate that government-created property?
If it's a good idea for the government to bring about a property market in spectrum by making it illegal for most of us to broadcast; why is it unreasonable for the government to impose some burdens on those broadcasters?
Given that the airwaves were ours to begin with, we ought to expect to make some money off of allocating this valuable resource to private firms. How much do we make per year for selling radio station licenses? TV licenses?
If that number is not obscenely high, then I would suggest that the massive value we are bequeathing to these private firms damn well ought to be freighted with social value-maximizing restrictions and requirements.
Why is it OK for the government to regulate property into existence, but not OK for the government to then regulate that government-created property?
-Magique
Posted by Magik Johnson | Link to this comment | 05-30-03 1:57 AM